"Monique Y. Mudama" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Even though I just ripped into you a few posts ago, you do have a > point here. It would be interesting if social security could be > altered so that (this is just off the top of my head here, so I'm sure > it's not by any means perfect, but maybe the glimmering of an idea): > > 1) By default, everyone pays into SS > > 2) Instead of the current system, every person has an individual SS > account, from which their own retirement would later be drawn > > 3) That account would invest in CDs or some other extremely low-risk > setup. Perhaps it could work like a bank instead, with an interest rate > based on balance (I'll admit I don't know enough about how banks work to > be sure that could work). > > 4) There would be a non-trivial, optional exam. If one passed the exam, > one could choose what to do with the money that would typically be given > to SS: leave it there, invest it, spend it on wine, women and song. > Whatever. But the exam would have to be good enough to ensure that the > taker is financially well-educated, and taking the exam would have to be > expensive enough to be a deterrent (shouldn't be a problem since it > would have to cover the costs of formulating the exam, etc).
Why so complicated? Just give people the option to *choose* between public or private SS programs. The same for schooling. If I send my children to a private school I wouldn't have to pay the tax and even get back what I already payed since I started working. That would make public schools compete against private schools. Andrei -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
